MARIO PIRES Vs. KARNATAKA STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed impugning an order of the Karnataka State Information Commission (for short 'the Commission'), imposing penalty of Rs. 10,000/-, recoverable out of the salary of the petitioner. Material facts which have been led to filing of this writ petition are the following:

(2.) Sri T.P. Vivekananda, learned advocate for the petitioner contended that the impugned order imposing penalty is arbitrary and illegal. He submitted that the Commission being a quasi judicial forum, the order passed imposing penalty must be supported by reasons, in as much as, duty to give reasons would enable the Court hearing a petition for issue of writ of certiorari to ex-facie ascertain whether there is any error apparent on the record. He further submitted that in the impugned order, the reasons being conspicuously absent and the reply submitted by the petitioner having not been objectively considered, the impugned order being wholly subjective and passed in excess of the jurisdiction, interference is warranted.

(3.) Sri G.B. Sharath Gowda, learned advocate for the 1st respondent, on the other hand contended that there being no dispute that the petitioner had not furnished the information within the time specified under sub-Section (1) of S. 7 of the Act, the Commission while deciding the complaint on 07.05.2012, by being of the opinion that the petitioner has committed the default, ordered to show cause why penalty under S. 20(1) of the Act should not be imposed for having not provided information to the complainant from 01.10.2011 to 07.05.2012 and after finding the reply dated 05.09.2012 is unacceptable, imposed the penalty. He submitted that the impugned order being in conformity with the provision under S. 20(1) of the Act is sustainable.